Heads up: found out on CNN this morning that the juror who is taking so many notes and speaking up for the jurors....may end up as forewoman is from a "gun family". For Bernies information. It is not just cop behavior when someone holsters their gun after shooting it. It is basic safety. Everyone who carries should be trained in the same safety as anyone else including cops. This juror should know this. GZ has all the language down because he is a responsible gun owner who got training when he started to carry a gun.

Can Bernie actually say that there's no evidence that TM could fight? Just because the judge didn't let it in, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

That's an excellent point. The issue came up in Arias v. State. The court approvingly quoted another case:

Quote

The prosecutor's use of the privilege of nondisclosure, first as a shield, then as a sword, unfairly prejudiced the defendant. While the State is free to argue to the jury any theory of a crime that is reasonably supported by evidence, it may not subvert the truth-seeking function of a trial by obtaining a conviction or sentence based on the obfuscation of relevant facts.

Adding:

Quote

In this case the toxicology results showed that the victim had a .21 blood alcohol level, traces of cocaine in the blood, and cocaine metabolites. The State successfully kept the jury from hearing the toxicology results. On cross-examination, the State then attacked the defendant's lay observations of the victim's intoxication on the theory that the defendant was not a qualified toxicologist. Further, the State's parting shot was to make it appear that the defendant's testimony that the victim "was acting crazy like on cocaine" was just an assumption. Of course, the State knew that the toxicology results (excluded on the State's motion) confirmed the defendant's observations. This cross-examination was totally improper. Because this cross-examination deprived the defendant of a fair trial, we must reverse for a new trial.

Bernardo had slides that recited elements of the law, not much of a deal as far as I'm concerned. He had another slide that listed perfectly legal actions, he didn't talk through them, but the implication is one that West was trying to avoid allowing the prosecutor to make.

He says there is no eyewitness that saw it happen, no movie. Quite a few slides are just shown, not talked through. One had to do with the direction of scooching vs.which way Zimmerman's jacket would ride.

Wraps up by requesting a verdict that speaks the truth, a guilty verdict. You hard from parents of both the victim and the defendant. But there can't be more photos of Martin. All because of the actions of Zimmerman, who is guilty of murder.